Category: India

  • Brisa Looks for India, Turkey Highway Chances After Brazil Exit

    Brisa Looks for India, Turkey Highway Chances After Brazil Exit

    Brisa-Auto Estradas de Portugal SA, Portugal’s biggest toll-road company, is looking for opportunities to expand in India and Turkey after selling its stake in Cia. de Concessoes Rodoviarias SA, Brazil’s biggest toll-road operator.

    “After selling CCR, Brisa’s portfolio is very unbalanced,” Chief Executive Officer Vasco de Mello said at a presentation to investors, according to a regulatory filing posted on the website of the country’s securities markets watchdog. “Too much concentrated in Portugal.”

    The company, based near Lisbon, plans to bid for a contract to operate and manage a highway in Mumbai, and sees opportunities in the privatization of motorways and Bosphorus bridges in Turkey. Brisa has already sold 9.4 percent of CCR and plans to sell the remaining 7 percent by the end of the year.

    Brisa is facing sluggish growth in Portugal as the country’s austerity measures to curb the budget deficit choke consumer demand. The company predicts higher toll revenue next year as drivers must now pay to use some competing highways that were formerly toll-free, and Brisa’s own tolls rising 0.6 percent.

    The company expects to invest between 200 million euros ($273 million) and 300 million euros in new business opportunities, according to the filing. Average annual capital spending on Portuguese highway projects for 2011 through 2015 will be 95 million euros, dropping to 65 million euros from 2016, it said.

    Toll Machines

    Brisa predicts operating costs will be unchanged in 2011, after dropping 4 percent this year, more than the 3 percent initially forecast. The company expects additional costs from the opening of new highways to be offset by savings from the introduction of cash and card toll machines on Portuguese highways, forecast to total 3.5 million euros from 2011.

    The company will complete its corporate reorganization by the end of the year, creating a holding company that will control its three business areas. Brisa said it will finish this year with net debt of 2.3 billion euros and has “no major short-term” refinancing needs.

    Brisa plans to pay a 31 euro-cent dividend to shareholders for the next five years and is considering a share buyback to bring its holding up to 10 percent, including 4 percent the company already owns.

    To contact the reporter on this story: Anabela Reis in Lisbon at areis1@bloomberg.net.

    To contact the editor responsible for this story: Angela Cullen at acullen8@bloomberg.net

    via Brisa Looks for India, Turkey Highway Chances After Brazil Exit – Bloomberg.

  • Turkish Airlines plans expansion in India

    Turkish Airlines plans expansion in India

    By IBTimes Staff Reporter | November 16, 2010 7:12 AM EST

    (Photo: REUTERS/Anatolian Anatolian) A Turkish Airlines Boeing 737-400
    (Photo: REUTERS/Anatolian Anatolian) A Turkish Airlines Boeing 737-400

    Turkish Airlines is mulling over starting flights from destinations in South India, Levent Bilman, Turkish Ambassador to India, told ENS, adding that this would connect Indian travelers to 93 places across Europe.

    “Turkish Airlines is exploring new destinations in India. Talks are on with civil aviation authority for connecting Istanbul with Chennai, Hyderabad and Kolkata,” he said.

    Currently operating seven flights from Mumbai and Delhi, the airline plans to increase its services with more than 14 flights a week.

    According to travel industry experts, Turkish Airlines will lure Indian travelers mainly for its connectivity to Europe, including destinations such as Germany, France, the UK and Russia. The airline’s connectivity to Middle East and Africa would be another attraction, they pointed out.

    Tourism industry officials note that more than half the tourists visiting Europe and Russia transit through Istanbul. Therefore, Turkish Airlines’ increased service between India and Turkey would be a tourist-friendly move.

    Turkish Airlines is expanding services globally. Recently the airline resumed services between Istanbul and Moscow with four flights a week, and launched nonstop flights from Istanbul to Washington DC.

    International Business Times

  • President Gül says Turkey may join ranks of BRIC countries

    President Gül says Turkey may join ranks of BRIC countries

    President Abdullah Gül has said he hoped Turkey’s economic progress would take it into the ranks of emerging BRIC countries — Brazil, Russia, India and China — although he made it clear Turkey remains committed to joining the European Union.

    Gül, in an interview with the Financial Times, said the international order was shifting towards the East. “It wouldn’t be surprising if we start talking about BRIC plus T,” he said. The BRIC countries are considered to be at a similar stage of newly advanced economic development, and their growing influence in the global scene is seen as an indication of the shift in economic power from the developed West towards the developing world.

    Turkey, which has built closer ties with its Middle East neighbors under the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government, has been accused in the West of turning away from the Western club and cozying up to countries such as Iran.

    Gül, who was on a visit to Britain to receive the prestigious Chatham House Prize, said in the interview that Turkey still saw membership in the EU as a “strategic vision” and wanted to be part of the principles that Europe defends, promising that Ankara would make sure it met all standards required for membership even though large parts of its entry negotiations are frozen.

    But Gül, speaking a day before the European Commission criticized Turkey for restrictions on freedom of expression and over Cyprus in an annual progress report released on Tuesday, also complained of political obstacles raised by some EU member countries. “We see certain political issues being included in the process, which have the effect of slowing down and, to a certain extent, hijacking these negotiations. We are not happy about this,” Gül told the Financial Times on Monday.

    Speaking in Oxford also on Monday, Gül said some EU member states were creating “artificial problems” in Turkey’s EU membership negotiations but said Turkey would stick to the task. “The injection of some political issues of certain member countries in the negotiating process leads to certain artificial problems that in our point of view are not fair and not acceptable,” he said at an event hosted by the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. “But Turkey is determined to move forward in the direction of working on the negotiations,” he said.

    Gül declined to name any country when he complained that certain, unnamed, “short-sighted” EU countries had hidden behind the Greek Cypriots to pursue their own objective of delaying Turkey’s membership bid in interviews with the British media. But Turkish officials say some EU countries, such as France, are using the impasse over Cyprus to stall Turkey’s accession bid.

    He also said one cannot say for sure that Turkey will eventually join the EU because there will be public votes in several EU countries on Turkish membership after conclusion of accession talks with Turkey. “When the time comes, those countries will decide whether or not Turkey would be a burden on them. Maybe Turkish people would say, ‘although we concluded the negotiation process successfully, let us not be a member’,” Gül told the BBC’s “HARDtalk.”

    Responding to a question on Turkey’s position regarding a planned NATO-wide missile defense system, Gül was hopeful that the alliance’s upcoming summit in Lisbon will produce a consensus on the issue. “The NATO Summit will convene in Lisbon next week. I think everybody will reach a consensus in the end,” he said.

    Turkey insists that no country should be named as a potential threat in relevant NATO documents, a reference to Turkey’s neighbor, Iran.

    When it was pointed out that US President Barack Obama addressed Muslim countries and relayed messages about peace and dialogue when he first came to power and he was asked whether Obama has caused disappointment since then, Gül said: “No, I think he is kindhearted. He does good things sincerely. However, maybe he could not succeed. Not only Muslims but others should listen to Obama. He should also persuade others, not just one party, to achieve peace in the region.”

    via Today’s Zaman, your gateway to Turkish daily news.

  • Commerce ministry to organise ‘India Show’ in Turkey

    Commerce ministry to organise ‘India Show’ in Turkey

    NEW DELHI: The commerce ministry will organise a four-day export fair in Istanbul in February next year with over 150 Indian companies likely to showcase their advanced engineering products in the Turkish capital.

    The main objective of the event, called India Show, is to promote the country’s image and provide a platform to Indian exporters to showcase their strengths and capabilities in an emerging market and developing country like Turkey , the commerce ministry said in a statement.

    The event, scheduled to be held Feb 3-6, will be organised by EEPC India, formerly Engineering Export Promotion Council , which works under the commerce and industry ministry.

    “The show will enable India to get closer to fast-growing markets in Eurasia and the Middle East and it will be our endeavour to highlight India as a technology hub for manufacturing industry,” R. Maitra, executive director of EEPC India, said in a statement.

    India Show will coincide with industrial exhibition World Industry Fair-2011 organised by Hannover Messe. India will be a partner country for the event.

    India would also sign a memorandum of understanding with the Istanbul Chamber of Commerce, aimed at strengthening economic relations between the two countries, during the show, Maitra said.

    via Commerce ministry to organise ‘India Show’ in Turkey – The Economic Times.

  • Role of Cuban Pilots in Jewish Air Exodus to Israel Revealed

    Role of Cuban Pilots in Jewish Air Exodus to Israel Revealed

    cubaFollowing the foundation of the State of Israel in 1948, a Cuban airline and a group of Cuban pilots were commissioned to transport all the Jewish people who wished to immigrate to the dawning state. Their many flights between 1951 and 1952 as part of what may be the largest air evacuation in human history had remained unknown until now.

    By: Luis Hernández Serrano

    Email: serrano@juventudrebelde.cu

    They were not diplomats or delegates going to an international convention, nor pilgrims on the search for indulgences or archaeological relics. The group of pilots that departed from Cuba in 1951 to the Holy Land had a different mission.

    The event remained unknown for almost 60 years. The Cuban pilots were to take part in the largest mass air evacuation in human history.

    Aviation historian Captain Rolando Marron told Juventud Rebelde newspaper the details of their ordeal.

    “In 1948,” he began, “the Republic of Israel was founded in a territory that had been part of Palestine and was under British control. The deficient economy of the country demanded arms to harvest the land and brains to administrate the dawning republic.”

    “In Europe, as a consequence of the recently concluded world war, there were hundreds of thousands of dispossessed Hebrews eager to move to the new homeland they were being offered. Large groups of immigrants began to arrive in Israel from all over Europe, as it was easier for them to find ways to get there.

    “As the relations between Jewish and Arabs became tenser in Arab countries, the Israeli government intervened to facilitate the evacuation of a larger number of Jewish people to their Promised Land.

    “Arab governments prohibited Jewish immigrants to travel by road, and the Egyptian blockade of the Suez Canal made it impossible for them to get to Israeli territory by sea.

    “The only option left was organizing a mass air evacuation. Negotiations began under acute time constraints. Since Israel had no diplomatic relations with Arab League member states, and planes bearing Israeli flags could not therefore be used for the exodus, they had to hire planes from a neutral country.

    “By coincidence, an important official of the Israeli mission in New York was a very good friend of Cuban businessman and civilian pilot Narciso V. Rosello Otero, who was appointed chair of the company created for the plan: Intercontinental Aerea de Cuba S.A

    “When the company had secured the required permits in Cuba, its central office opened at 464 Zulueta, in Old Havana, and a branch office was also inaugurated in Nicosia, Cyprus.

    The historian said that while the final arrangements were made to the administrative structure of the company, Cuban pilot were hired, in compliance with Cuban laws, to fly the planes.

    “The first group was made up of five pilots who were unemployed at the time because the company they worked for, Aerovias Cubanas Internacionales S.A., had gone bankrupt due to the incipient development of domestic commercial flights in Cuba.

    The Air Exodus

    Historian Marron adds that during the nearly two years that the mission lasted, more than 115,000 refugees were brought from Iraq; 25,000 from Iran, and a few hundred from India and Yemen. The Yemen refugees had to cross the border to reach the English territory of Aden to board the planes.

    “Most of the refugees from Iraq boarded at the airport of Baghdad, and the rest in Bahra, near the famed Abadan oil refinery, at the important oil harbour located only a few miles away from the Persian Gulf border.”

    The historian noted that it was in Iraq where the Jewish passengers experienced the most difficulties, given the persecutions and dangers they faced in that country, and it was necessary to evacuate them as soon as possible. The abovementioned number of Iraqi refugees was rescued over a period of approximately ten months.

    “The Iranian refugees,” continued Marron, “were picked at the Teheran airport. They were not forced to leave the country, and all of them immigrated to Israel voluntarily, with the exception of 1,000 who had escaped from Iraq and Afghanistan through the border, and could not remain in Iran due to immigration regulations.

    “The longest flights were to Bombay, in India, where a few hundred decided to immigrate. Many of them would return later to India because they were not able to adapt to the living conditions they found in their new homeland.

    “Taking off from the modern Lydda airport in Tel Aviv, the flight had a stopover in Sharjah, at the Royal British Air Force base, in the remote area of Oman Trucial off the coast of the Arabian Peninsula, in the Persian Gulf.

    “A typical Arab village by the seaside and the barracks of the English troops were the only signs of life near the airfield in the middle of the dessert. The second part of the trip was the crossing of the Indic Ocean, battered by the dangerous monsoons, and the journey concluded at the Santa Cruz airport in Bombay.

    “The hardest and more frequent routes were Lydda-Baghdad and Lydda-Teheran,” said Marron.

    A Forced Landing

    “Although the first of these routes was relatively easy in the winter,” explained Marron, “flying conditions would drastically change in the summer, when sandstorms considerably reduced visibility in Baghdad, impeding access to the airport. Sometimes pilots had to land in alternate airfields to wait for the weather conditions in their places of destination to change.

    “Furthermore, high temperatures affected the performance of plane engines. In Baghdad, it was normal to have temperatures between 45ºC and 50ºC in the shade! And not only at noon, but also in the morning and late afternoon. That is why pilots always tried to take off in the night, in order to gain time.

    “Adolfo Diaz Vazquez was the only pilot who had to make a forced landing during the evacuation program. One of the engines of the C-46 he was flying stopped on route between Baghdad and Lydda, at night! Thanks to his vast experience, all the passengers and the plane escaped unharmed. The passengers and the crew were taken to Israel in another plane. Some days later, Eugenio Ramos Escandon flew the plane to Lydda. The aircraft had been repaired by a group of Cuban mechanics under the guidance of Eduardo Segredo Salgado.

    “By the end of 1952, the wave of immigration to Israel decreased and some of the planes that had been used for these ends began flying to European cities: Paris, Rome, Amsterdam, Zurich, London, Athens and Geneva.

    “In early 1953, the group of Cuban pilots returned to Cuba, after having successfully transported almost 150,000 Jewish immigrants to Israel. The crew of these flights wore an insignia with a Cuban flag on their uniforms.

    “The main base of operations of the Intercontinental Aerea de Cuba S.A. Company was always in Cuba, but its planes never flew in the national territory; they never even touched Cuban soil. Part of the money earned in this operation was probably used to bribe the Cuban president at the time, since permits were only granted following a local inspection of the aircrafts.

    Pilots who took part in the evacuation program:

    Manuel Gonzalez Linares, with more than 6,000 hours of flight.

    Eugenio Ramos Escandon, experienced C-46 capatain.

    Guillermo Verdaguer Boan, survivor of a plane crash in which one of his comrades lost his life.

    Miguel Acosta Rosellp.

    Antonio “Nico” Fernandez Martinez

    Adolfo Diaz Vazquez, also known as “Lindbergh,” an aerobatics champion. He was the sixth pilot on Narciso Rosello’s payroll.

    Eduardo Segredo Salgado, the brilliant mechanic of the team.

    The Zionist State of Israel

    When the Second World War ended in 1945, Jewish political organizations led by Theodor Herzl pushed for the creation of a state that should have its capital in Jerusalem, Palestine, which was a British protectorate at the time. The plan was to give the Jewish victims of the Nazi genocide a place to start over after the war. It is said that the area was infiltrated by terrorist groups with a view to speeding up the British withdrawal.

    Arab Palestinians, with the support of Eastern Arab states, energetically opposed the plan, which was paradoxically fascist. The wave of immigration had the support of US and British Jewish organizations, and a US-British supervising commission was created for the forced Jewish colonization.

    After the failure of the Conference of Palestine in 1947, England brought the issue to the attention of United Nations, and in November of that year, a plan was drawn up to split the Palestinian territory into two states: a Jewish state and an Arab state. On May 14, 1948, when there were only a few hours left before the British rule was to expire, the Jewish proclaimed the independence of the Hebrew state, and they called it Israel.

    Arab government representatives, who never agreed to the UN ruling, rejected this political decision, giving way to an armed conflict in which the Zionist groups, that were better trained and equipped, managed to expand their domain over a broader area, extending as far as the Jordan River. They would later gain more and more ground.

    The foundation in 1948 of the Zionist state in the heart of the Arab region was the beginning of the historic suffering of the Palestinian people, which has come to be one of the most heartbreaking contemporary conflicts in the world.

    In 1967, for example, the human cost of the conflict amounted to more than one million displaced Arab Palestinians, their homes and lands given to the Jewish settlers from Europe.

    It is a fact that the state of Israel was founded by splitting up the Palestinian territory inhabited by Arab Palestinians who had been born in those lands, with the objective of bringing justice to the Jewish people but at the cost of a new injustice.

    Israel’s subsequent history has been a history of unstoppable territorial expansionism in order to gain more land and water, and consolidate their privileged geopolitical position.

    , 21.10.2010

    [2]

    In 1951-52, Cuban dictatorship operated Jewish immigration airlift to Israel

    The Cuban newspaper Juventud Rebelde (Rebel Youth) reported that an airlift was organized in the early 1950s by the Cuban company Intercontinental Aérea de Cuba S.A., owned by businessman Narciso V. Roselló Otero, to fly 150 000 Jewish immigrants to Israel (of which 115 000 were from Iraq and 25 000 from Iran).

    These revelations shed light on a little-known operation until now.

    In order to colonize Palestine, the Zionist movement planned to displace not only the European survivors of Nazi persecutions, but also the Jewish populations living in the Middle East.

    To compel Iraqi Jews to emigrate, the Zionist movement mounted an operation in three stages:
    An agreement was reached with pro-British Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Said to force Iraqi Jews to accept a one-way ticket to Israel. On 9 March 1950, Parliament adopted a law requiring that Iraqi Jews leaving the country had to renounce their citizenship in writing and would not be allowed to return.
    From 19 March 1950 to 30 January 1951, a series of bomb attacks targeted the venues of Jewish congregation. The attacks were falsely attributed to the Golden Square officers (who had sided with Germany against the British during World War II). As it is, they had been orchestrated by Israeli intelligence under the direction of Mordechaï Ben Porat (as endorsed in 1956 by Uri Avnery’s Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh).
    Immediately, an airlift was set up from Cuba by the dictatorial regime of General Fulgencio Batista enabling the evacuation of 115 000 Jews, terrified by the turn of events. Cuban planes and pilots took off from Baghdad stopping over in Nicosia (Cyprus). Towards the end of the operation, planes with a bigger capacity shuttled from Iraq to Israel directly so as to speed up the operation.

    Mordechaï Porat, a terrorist with close ties to David Ben-Gurion, served four times as member of parliament and once as minister without portfolio. In 2001, he was awarded the Israel Prize for the whole of his career and in particular for having pushed Iraqi Jews to emigrate.

    Narciso V. Roselló left Cuba for the United States after the attack on his home at the hands of Fidel Castro’s revolutionaries, who thus confiscated the weapons that they used to conquer Havana and overthrow General Batista.

    ==

    “Pilotos cubanos en la Tierra Santa”, by Luis Hernández Serrano, Juventud Rebelde, 16 October 2010.

    Bibliography:
    Ropes of Sand : America’s Failure in the Middle East, by Wilbur Crane Eveland, WW Norton & Co (1981, 382 p.), ISBN-13 : 978-0393013368.
    Ben Gurion’s Scandal : How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews, by Naeim Giladi, Dandelion Books,U.S. (Seconde edition 2003, 364 p.), ISBN-13 : 978-1893302402.

    https://www.voltairenet.org/article167398.html, 24 OCTOBER 2010

  • Elephant and Dragon

    Elephant and Dragon

    indian elephant chinese dragon

    BALAJI CHANDRAMOHAN

    It is understandable and predictable that Asia’s two giants – India and China – should be gearing up for a showdown somewhat similar to the East-West showdown of the Cold War. Given both countries’ growing economies, and given the waning influence of the West in global affairs, India and China are increasing their foothold in distant corners of the world through trade, investment, bilateral treaties and security relationships.

    In this classic ‘great power’ rivalry, China wishes to win by keeping India in low-level equilibrium – for instance, by denying permission to an Indian lieutenant-general posted in the state of Jammu and Kashmir to visit China. The officer in question had intended to travel to China in August of this year for a high-level defence exchange between the two countries.

    What is more, if media reports are to be believed, then policy-makers in New Delhi are losing sleep over the fact that 7,000 to 11,000 Chinese troops are present in Gilgit in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir – something that the Indian government is trying to verify, although Pakistan’s envoy to Beijing has denied the reports. The reports say that People’s Liberation Army soldiers entering Gilgit-Baltistan are expected to work on the railroad and on extending the highly strategic Karakoram Highway – a clear sign that China wishes to extend its influence in the oil-rich gulf region. There are also reports about a six-month visa to visit China having been issued Paresh Barua, Commander-in-Chief of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), a militant organization based in Northeast India.

    Reacting to China’s aggressive posture, the Government of India recently held a meeting of the Cabinet Committee of Security, chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. New Delhi’s envoy to Beijing, S. Jaishankar, briefed the Committee on the current state of Sino-Indian relations.

    Following the Bush presidency, given the general reluctance of the Obama administration to ‘contain’ China (let alone to engage on a sustained basis in Asia at large), China has decided to have a ‘free go’ throughout the world. This ‘free go’ has necessitated the establishment of a firm Chinese foothold in the Asia-Pacific region, from which it can broaden its sphere of strategic influence even to Africa, Latin America and Europe. India acts as a distinct challenger in this respect. With a population of more than one billion people, a growing economy and supple latent power, India is a clear leader in the affairs of South Asia. It has also increased its influence in Southeast Asia through its ‘Look East’ policy. In fact, East Asian countries like South Korea and Japan are more inclined to cooperate, and look for active strategic partnership, with India rather than with China. India has also started to spread its wings through active diplomatic ventures in Africa through the Indo-African forum, and in the South Pacific Islands through the Pacific Islands Forum. Furthermore, India has initiated more active dialogue with its diasporic populations through the annual Pravasi Bharatiya Divas festival that fosters better relations between expatriate Indians and Indians living in India. Indeed, the Indo-American civil nuclear deal that was sealed during the Bush administration would not have happened without the active lobbying of Indo-Americans. This has pushed India to initiate a ‘Forward Policy’ in its diplomacy.

    All of this has irritated Beijing in that it has understood that, to clip the wings of the spreading India, China must first ‘box-in’ India in South Asia. That is precisely the strategy of Beijing in aiding Pakistan to follow an aggressive posture in its diplomatic relations with India. With India being distracted in Pakistan, and with the US distracted in Afghanistan and Iraq, China can expand quickly in Asia; that is, it can clearly establish many more ‘strategic condominiums’ in the world. In this sense, China profits from its authoritarian and more monolithic decision-making processes and culture in respect of international relations – as compared with the more reactive processes of major democratic states like India and the US. India, for its part, also suffers from the general dearth of strategic culture and acumen within its political class – a weakness compounded by the absence of emphasis on foreign policy in day-to-day media discourse in India. Though Manmohan Singh is not a classical professional politician, and while he could be considered of a statesman of the highest order (a later article with GB will deal with his declining popularity in India, and the reasons thereof), the general Indian policy inclination to look inward as a matter of dominant priority has manifestly prevented him from engaging with the international more actively.

    Take the case of Iran. The US is trying to engage with Iran through China, as India, the traditional ally of Iran, is left in the cold and dark. The abandonment of the foreign policy front by the political class in India has, as a rule, meant that major chunks of strategic decision-making on foreign policy have fallen to India’s army men. In this respect, India has decided to play to its strengths – understood as it is that India and China are both continental and naval powers. To counter China’s much-touted ‘Strings of Pearl’ strategy, India has decided to pursue active ‘naval diplomacy.’ China’s ‘Strings of Pearl’ strategy includes building deep-sea naval positions on the southern coast of Sri Lanka in the once sleepy fishing town of Hambantota. Moreover, China has helped Pakistan to build a deep-sea port in the town of Gadara in Baluchistan. It has also started to court the littoral states in the Indian Ocean – the Maldives, Mauritius and Seychelles – and invested funds in these micro-states to boost economic prospects. In return, China has sought to allow its bases to continue to be stationed in these littoral states. As a part of its counter-strategy, India is sending its naval officers on a routine trip to these countries. There are regular exchanges between India and these states at the naval officer level. India is also establishing for the Maldives a network of radars that will help the island nation offset for the plain fact that it lacks a navy. (Traditionally, all great powers that aspired to control the Indian Ocean – Portugal, the Netherlands, Great Britain, the US and the Soviet Union – have required a base in the Maldives. The southernmost island of the Maldives, the Gan Island in the Seenu Atoll, served as a base for the British Royal Navy during WW2.)

    The Indo-China great power rivalry is the story of the first part of the 21st century – much like the rivalry between Great Britain and Germany was the dominant strategic dyad in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This rivalry was classically described by John J. Mearsheimer in his book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. Wrote Mearsheimer: “Great powers behave aggressively not because they want to or because they possess some inner drive to dominate, but because they have to seek more power if they want to maximize their odds of survival.” Raw realism has been the forté of China’s conduct in world affairs since 1949 when the People’s Republic of China was established. For its part, India’s foreign policy has always flirted with moralism-cum-idealism. However, at the start of this new century, India had understood the importance of Realpolitik. Indian politicians are deft in conducting domestic politics – particularly in the area of alliance-building. They will need to show similar genius in world affairs if they are to counter China’s Dragon.

    Balaji Chandramohan is the Asia-Pacific correspondent of World News Forecast and Editor, Asia, with World Security Network. He is based in New Delhi and Wellington, New Zealand.

    , October 1, 2010